April 21, 2008 - May 2, 2008; May 26, 2008 - May 28, 2008: Egypt is running circles around the states in the European Union, while the Islamic Conference now controls the African Regional Group. And nobody is prepared to stop them.

IRAN BECOMES A MEMBER OF THE INNER CIRCLE OF THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF UN "ANTI-RACISM" CONFERENCE

New York -- EYEontheUN reports that Iran has become a member of the "Group of Friends of the Chair", an informal group of states charged with taking the first steps towards producing a Durban II manifesto. Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN says: "the travesty of Durban II as a vehicle for getting serious about combating racism is more obvious than ever, as a regime whose President is a Holocaust-denier acquires an important role in shaping the result."

Durban II - known formally as the UN Durban Review Conference - will be held next April in Geneva. It is charged with implementing the notorious 2001 Durban Declaration which found Israel guilty of racism and gave no other country even a passing mention.

The role of his "friends" is described by Armenian Chairman Zohrab Mnatsakanian as "engaging in brainstorming and consolidating inputs." Other members of the behind-the-scenes group are Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Egypt. Bayefsky adds, "one shudders to imagine the brainstorming among such human rights paragons."

The "friends of the Chair" have already met twice in July 2008 and intend to meet again shortly.

By creating this informal group, UN states have deliberately created a forum which excludes NGOs for the first time from the Durban II process.

The first contribution of the "Group of Friends" will be filed at the next stage of the process, the 'Intersessional Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group' session to be held in Geneva September 1-5, 2008.

"The authority figures surrounding Durban II remind us once again that this forum is an instrument serving those states bent on defeating human rights not protecting them," said Bayefsky.

New York -- Preparations for the UN Durban II racism conference are confirming the worst fears about the conference's anti-Israel and anti-democratic agenda, EYEontheUN reports. At the African regional meeting on Durban II in Abuja, Nigeria, which ended yesterday, UN member states "employed the old tactics of singling out Israel, ignoring egregious human rights violations such as genocide, and challenging fundamental democratic freedoms," said Anne Bayefsky, Senior Editor of EYEontheUN.org.

"The obvious result of mentioning only the Palestinians as victims of racism is to demonize the Jewish state," noted Bayefsky.

UN member states gathered in Nigeria projected a clear commitment to democratic principles, calling on states to codify "permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression" and to elaborate "a voluntary ethical code of conduct...to address racism in the media and other modern information and communication technologies while taking into account fundamental issues, such as the right to freedom of expression..."

The Abuja Declaration also gives Islam special preference by calling on states to "pay attention to the serious nature of incitement to religious hatred such as anti-semitism, Christianophobia and more particularly, Islamophobia."

Furthermore, the Abuja Declaration attempts to stifle efforts to combat terrorism by linking counterterrorism measures to "the rise of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance..."

"The United Nations, which still cannot manage to define terrorism, has instead focused on placing roadblocks in the way of counterterrorism measures," said Bayefsky. "Charging counterterrorism activities with racism is a favorite."

Like many UN endeavours, the Abuja Declaration attempts to institutionalize the Durban agenda under the guise of "follow-up."

The Abuja meeting is part of ongoing preparation for the Durban II conference, slated to take place in Geneva in 2009. The African conference is the second regional preparatory gathering, and the Abuja Declaration will be used to prepare the final outcome document of the Durban II conference itself. Canada, the United States, and Israel have been boycotting the meetings associated with the Durban II conference, recognizing that the forum has been hijacked by human rights violators to the detriment of human rights victims everywhere. "The Abuja Declaration indicates that continued participation by democratic nations in the Durban II process sends precisely the wrong singals to rights-abusing states and their victims," Bayefsky warned.

New York - EYEontheUN reports that Iran, a country whose president repeatedly denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map, will be busy over the next few weeks engaged in UN "anti-racism" activities associated with the Durban II conference. One of the preparatory committees for Durban II, the Intersessional Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group, decided today that the next stage of the process of drafting a final declaration for Durban II will lie with the so-called Friends of the Chair. The Friends group includes such human rights luminaries as Iran, Pakistan and Egypt. It will be responsible, together with the Chair, for integrating the conclusions of the Durban-related African regional meeting, which took place in Abuja on August 26th, into the final Durban II document. The Abuja declaration includes statements brandishing Israel as racist and threatening free speech.

The Working Group's latest draft released today raises additional concerns for Durban II as a vehicle for undermining free speech, since it contains indications that the media will be a target of an "anti-racism" agenda.

Furthermore, the Working Group decided to hold its next meeting on September 29, 2008, which is the eve of Rosh Hashanah, a date that will prevent most Jewish NGOs outside of Geneva from attending. This follows the decision of the Durban Preparatory Committee, to which the Working Group reports, to hold both of its preparatory meetings on major Jewish holidays - Passover in April 2008 and Yom Kippur in October 2008. (The Durban II conference is scheduled for April 2009 in Geneva.)

"While Canada, Israel and the United States are rightly not participating in any of these Durban II preprations, the European Union continues the fiction that this is a process of building consensus among equals, knowing full well that they don't have the votes to prevail and can do little more than rubber stamp the priorities of the Arab, African and Asian Groups" said Anne Bayefsky, Senior Editor of EYEontheUN. "It seems clear that the European Union has no intention of denying Durban II the legitimacy which its racist state supporters desperately seek," added Bayefsky.

ISLAMIC STATES LAUNCH FRONTAL ASSAULT ON ISRAEL, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OTHER HUMAN RIGHTS UNDER THE BANNER OF THE UN DURBAN II RACISM CONFERENCE

Geneva -- On the eve of the Jewish New Year, Islamic states launched a frontal assault on Israel, freedom of expression and human rights. Their platform is the UN's "anti-racism" forum - the Durban Review Conference which will take place in Geneva in April 2009. On September 29, 2008 the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) laid bare their intended plan of action in a written contribution circulated for the first time. Planning for Durban II entered a new phase as a working draft of the final document to be adopted at the Conference was also unveiled at a planning meeting in Geneva.

The OIC has now said it expects Durban II to repeat or add the following to the travesty of the first Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA):

A list of multiple allegations of alleged Israeli human rights violations is accompanied by a demand that Durban II "must look into the human rights situation and urge member states to implement the provisions of the DDPA". Those provisions include the claim that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. Wild trumped-up statements of global Islamophobia which in turn justify gross violations of freedom of expression around the world.

False racism charges intended to justify the introduction of roadblocks to the fight against terrorism and Islamic extremism. Claims that "defamation of religion" trumps individual rights and freedoms, and that individual rights must take a back seat to the protection of unimpeachable "religious" views.

The anti-racism offensive is characterized by ever-expanding fictional affronts. The so-called victims are championed by governments that have no interest in protecting human rights at home. The feigned interest in freedom of religion comes from Muslim states where changing religion or apostasy is a crime punishable by death. OIC plans for Durban II - now central issues for the planning committee - include: "…obstacles hampering progress in the collective struggle against racism and racial discrimination include…persisting impunity on…freedom of expression, counter terrorism or national security." "

"The most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia…when it is expressed in the form of defamation of religions, it takes cover behind the freedom of expression and when it is expressed in the form of profiling. It hides behind the war against terrorism. The OIC believes that association of terrorism and violence with Islam or any other religion including through publication of offensive caricatures and making of hate documentaries would purposely complicate our common endeavours to address several contemporary issues including fight against terrorism and occupation of foreign territories and peoples." " "… some of the most worrying trends since 2001 include racio-religious profiling and discrimination, defamation of Muslims, their faith and beliefs, incitement to religious hatred and its concomitant effects on multiculturalism, national and international peace and stability as well as human rights of the affected communities."

What's next for this dangerous nonsense? The OIC "contribution" moves to the next stage of the planning process, the October 6-17 meeting of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for Durban II. In the words of the new working draft, the OIC submission will be subject to "negotiations with a view to incorporating [it] into a consolidated outcome document of the Review Conference." In other words, there is already an intention to turn the OIC assault on human rights into part of the final declaration.

Bear in mind, who is controlling the Durban II agenda from start to finish. Libya chairs the PrepCom and in that capacity has been manipulating the procedures to favor the OIC. Other "human rights" authority figures shaping Durban II, are Cuba, the Rapporteur and Iran a Vice-Chair of the executive committee of the PrepCom. The PrepCom itself is composed of exactly the same members as the UN Human Rights Council - and that means the OIC has the balance of power. The OIC holds the majority of seats in both the African and Asian regional groups which in turn hold the majority of seats on the PrepCom/Human Rights Council.

The Durban II working draft called "Certain indicative elements in relation to the outcome document" is also alarming in other ways. This "basis of negotiations" demands "concrete actions to ensure the eradication of discrimination" for victims categorized in the DDPA. That includes Palestinian victims of Israeli racism.

Also subject to "negotiations with a view to incorporating [it] into a consolidated outcome document of the Review Conference" is the Abuja Declaration. This is the product of the African regional group meeting on Durban II which took place in Abuja, Nigeria at the end of August. The Abuja Declaration, from the African meeting, takes its inspiration from "the values and principles of human dignity and equality enshrined in the...African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights." Those values include a "vow to undertak[e] to eliminate...zionism." Furthermore, the Abuja Declaration

repeats the Israel is racist charge. Its victims of racism include "concern about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation singles out Israel. No other country-specific victims are identified.

challenges the right to freedom of expression by calling on states to "elaborate" "permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression" and to "elaborate" "a voluntary ethical code of conduct" for journalists gives Islam special preference. It calls on states to "pay attention to the serious nature of incitement to religious hatred such as anti-semitism, Christianophobia and more particularly, Islamophobia."

attempts to restrain efforts to combat terrorism. It links counterterrorism measures to "the rise of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance..." The process as well as the substance of Durban II is also shameful. Next week, the Preparatory Committee of an anti-racism conference will meet to discuss xenophobia over the holiest day of the Jewish year, Yom Kippur. Last April the OIC derailed an application of a Jewish NGO to attend the conference. That meeting was scheduled over the Jewish holiday of Passover. There is no doubt that the efforts to exclude Jews from the process are deliberate.

Canada, the U.S. and Israel are not attending the Durban II planning meetings. They should be joined by the European Union and Australia immediately. The red-lines of those still waiting on the sidelines and refusing to join Canada's unequivocal boycott call, like the American Jewish Committee, have been crossed.

Here come another of those "Guilt by Associations" that Senator Barack Obama will try to weasel himself out of. As you may know, Philip Berg is suing Senator Obama in Civil Court. Berg wants Obama to Produce his real birth certificate to prove that he meets the citizenship requirements to be President. Rather than just product the birth certificate (is he trying to hide something?) Obama's legal team filed a motion to dismiss. One of the Lawyers filing the motion was Joe Sandler (sandler@sandlerreiff.com) of the Washington law firm Sandler, Reiff, and Young...

Joe Sandler? Sandler, Reiff, and Young?

Joe Sandler was the CAIR lawyer who sent a letter to the Young America's Foundation in August 2007, threatening them with legal action if they let me speak to their national student conference. (You can see the letter here http://jihadwatch.org/archives/017609.php .) I spoke anyway (YAF's Jason Mattera said, "CAIR can go to hell and take their seventy-two virgins with them"), and the threatened lawsuit did not materialize (at least as of this writing, over a year later).

But now here again http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022880.php Obama allies himself with someone who has but scant regard for the freedom of speech. Will he, as President, sacrifice that freedom in an attempt to build the bridges with the Islamic world that he has boasted of being able to build? Here is a full discussion of that possibility.

I hope that Barack Obama, when he becomes President, will become a staunch defender of the First Amendment against attempts by the Muslim Brotherhood and the Organization of the Islamic Conference to limit it or destroy it altogether. But his hiring of Joseph Sandler is not at all reassuring.

South Africa and members of the NGO community are now raising the prospects of an NGO Forum alongside the Durban II Conference to be held in Geneva next April. The NGO Forum of the 2001 UN "anti-racism" conference provided a global platform for virulent anti-semitism.

South African representative, October 7, 2008: "I think we are now all in full agreement about the maximum participation of NGOs... And I think there are also other opportunities, as happened at the World Conference Against Racism, that NGOs in fact can gather in their own setting and they can then come up with constructive input that they can then deliver at the point in time that [they are] allowed to make such interventions. That would certainly help the process. But it has to be in some sort of forum setting so that at least they have an opportunity to talk amongst themselves as to how best to take the process forward from their point of view and to assist the intergovernmental process."

On October 8, 2008, a flyer was distributed in Palais Des Nations room XXI, which announced that on Wednesday, October 15th members of the NGO Committee Against Racism and Racial Discrimination (CONGO) and World Against Racism Network (WARN) are organizing a discussion on "Preparing the NGO Forum for the Durban Review Conference 2009".

mariaAdministrateur Messages postés : 14591

Posté le 13/10/2008 01:16:39 (13/10/2008 10:16:39)

ANTISEMITISM AT THE UN UNDER THE GUISE OF "COMBATING RACISM"

Iran - a Vice-President of the Durban II PrepCom - thinks the antisemitism expressed by the Iranian President is not relevant

"EQUALITY" AT THE UNITED NATIONS UNDER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION OF THE ISLAMIC CONFERENCE

October 8-9, 2008: The only two substantive planning sessions for the UN's so-called "anti-racism" conference - known as Durban II - were deliberately planned over major Jewish holidays, including the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, Yom Kippur.

September 30, 2008: By contrast, in order to observe the Eid holiday to mark the end of Ramadan, the United Nations shut down totally in both New York and in Geneva.

The real double-standards:

* * * * *

* * * * *

Jewish Holiday Dates in 2008

PassoverNo work permitted on April 20-21, 26-27. Nightfall of April 20 through nightfall of April 27.

Yom KippurNo work is permitted. Sunset of October 8 through nightfall of October 9.

* * * * *

* * * * *

* * * * *

* * * * *

###

EYEontheUN is an independent UN monitor headquartered in New York and is dedicated to making transparent the UN's record on its fundamental promise-to identify, condemn, and protect against human rights violations and confront and respond to threats to international peace and security.

Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, is a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust.

The shocking text of the "Draft Outcome Document" to be adopted at the UN's so-called anti-racism conference, Durban II, has just been released. It features:

accusations that Israel is guilty of apartheid, crimes against humanity and genocide allegations that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism the accusation that Zionism is racism by referring to a "racially based law of return" claims of a right of return that would end the Jewishness of the state of Israel an effort to end Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem an attempt to strangle free speech by demands that states "encourage objective and balanced portrayals of people, events and history, especially in the media" a demand that states adopt laws to invade public and private life for the purposes of "preventing and punishing expressly and specifically contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in public and private life" an insistence that the world media be governed by "a code of ethical conduct with a view to prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred" an effort to tarnish "counterterrorism or national security" efforts with the accusation that they "hamper...progress in the collective struggle against racism" trumped-up accusations of global Muslim victimhood - including the claim that "the most serious manifestations of defamation of religions are the increase in Islamophobia and the worsening of the situation of Muslim minorities around the world"- a blatant effort by states sponsors of terrorism to turn attention away from their own heinous behavior by reinventing themselves as victims demands for broad new laws that would undercut democratic rights and freedoms in the name of religious sensibilities: "take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scrïptures and symbols."

During the week of October 13, 2008, democratic states led by the European Union are sitting down to conduct a second reading of this outrageous "anti-racism" document. The continued participation of democratic states like the EU and Australia in the Durban II forum is legitimizing a global discussion for and against antisemitism, for and against a Jewish state, for and against freedom of expression. Instead of providing a global platform to the enemies of human rights, they should immediately join Canada, the United States and Israel and get out.

***

The Second Substantive Session of the Durban II Preparatory Committee

Selected Provisions in the "Draft Outcome Document"

THE DEMONIZATION OF ISRAEL AND OF JEWISH SELF-DETERMINATION

Section 1 - Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

57. Reaffirm that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;

114. Reiterates its concern about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupations, urges respect for international human rights law and international humanitarian law and calls for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region;

115. Notes that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination. In order to consolidate the occupation, they have been subjected to unlawful collective punishment, torture, economic blockade, severe restriction on movement and arbitrary closure of their territories. Illegal settlements continue to be built in the occupied territories. The Review Conference must look into the human rights situation and urge member states to implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East.

116. Express deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return, and recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

117. Re-emphasize the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the rights to life, liberty and self-determination;

E. Strategies to achieve full and effective equality, including international cooperation and enhancement of the United Nations and other international mechanisms in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

305. Recognize Jerusalem as a city of reverence and religious sanctity for three major religions of the world and call for an international effort to bring foreign occupation, together with all its racial practices, to an end, especially in holy shrines dear to the three religions;

Section 4 - Identification and sharing of best practices achieved at the national,regional and international levels in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

General

11. Reaffirm that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

25. Express deep regret the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories which have an impact on all aspects of their daily existence such as to prevent the enjoyment of fundamental rights, express our deep concern about this situation and renew the call for the cessation of all the practices of racial discrimination to which the Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the Arab territories occupied by Israel are subjected;

26. Reiterate that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination and urge member States to look at the situation of Palestinian people during the Durban Review Conference and implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East;

ATTACKING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION BY ALL MEANS

Section 4 - Identification and sharing of best practices achieved at the national,regional and international levels in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

General

4. The OIC strongly believes …misuse or abuse, as provided in Article 20 of the ICCPR and Article 4 of the ICERD must be taken into account to avoid possible negative fall outs. Therefore, while elaborating specific laws on combating incitement to racial and religious hatred, these must conform to the relevant provision of ICCPR and ICERD;

10.(h) - Adopting measures to address the issue of hate speech in the Media, including on the Internet;

Combating

24 (c) Elaborating specific laws on combating incitement to racial and religious hatred, in conformity with obligations under article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

11… recent events have once again highlighted the need to demarcate the legal contours between freedom of expression and hate speech. OHCHR's proposed Expert Consultations on the permissible limits to freedom of expression, by taking into account the mandatory prohibition of advocacy of religious hatred, should reach some conclusions and recommendations coming out from the consultations should be worthy of including in the Review Conference documents.

74. Recommend that the use of the new information technologies, including the Internet, should contribute to combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and that they should also be used to promote tolerance and respect for diversity;

75. Call upon States to prevent, through all appropriate means, stereotyping of any ethnic, racial, national, cultural, religious and linguistic group, and encourage objective and balanced portrayals of people, events and history, especially in the media, recognizing the profound influence that such portrayals have on societal perceptions of groups whose members are frequently victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

83. Urges States to adopt and enforce legal and administrative measures at the national and local levels, or to strengthen existing measures, with the aim of preventing and punishing expressly and specifically contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in public and private life;

100. Call upon the world media to establish and disseminate through their relevant associations and organizations a code of ethical conduct with a view to prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred and discrimination in any form, and promoting mutual respect and tolerance among all peoples;

147. Stresses the importance of the work of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards to elaborate a basic document to fill the gaps in the existing international treaties about the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination;

148. Call upon the Durban Review Conference to provide guidelines for States taking into account the assessment of various Durban follow up mechanisms as well as the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the issue of defamation or negative stereotyping of religions;

ATTEMPTING TO THWART EFFORTS TO END TERRORISM

Section 1 - Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

C. Measures of prevention, education and protection aimed at the eradication of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance at all levels

160. Noting that some of the other obstacles hampering progress in the collective struggle against racism and racial discrimination include; weak legislation and policies, lack of moral, educational and practical strategies, non-implementation of international legal framework and commitments by some, persisting impunity on different grounds such as freedom of expression, counter terrorism or national security…

D. Provision of effective remedies, recourse, redress, and compensatory and other measures at all levels

212. Call on states to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as on the grounds of culture, religion and language and that non-citizens are not subjected to racial or ethnic profiling or stereotyping;

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

142.Call on states to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as on the grounds of culture, religion and language and that non-citizens are not subjected to racial or ethnic profiling or stereotyping;

THE VICTIMHOOD GAME: ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MUSLIMS

Section 1 - Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

26. Note that, some of the most worrying trends since 2001 include racio-religious profiling and discrimination, defamation of Muslims, their faith and beliefs, incitement to religious hatred and its concomitant effects on multiculturalism, national and international peace and stability as well as human rights of the affected communities.

28. Shares the assessment that the most serious manifestations of defamation of religions are the increase in Islamophobia and the worsening of the situation of Muslim minorities around the world. He has mentioned three main developments in this context; a) the stereotypical association of Islam (and Muslims) with violence and terrorism; b) the determination to impose restrictions on manifestation of Islam including construction of mosques and its minarets; and c) monitoring and surveillance of places of worship, culture and teaching of Islam.

30. Acknowledges that the most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia. When it is expressed against migrants it takes the form of religo-ethnic or religo-racial tones, when it is expressed in the form of defamation of religions, it takes cover behind the freedom of expression and when it is expressed in the form of profiling. It hides behind the war against terrorism. Believes that association of terrorism and violence with Islam or any other religion including through publication of offensive caricatures and making of hate documentaries would purposely complicate our common endeavours to address several contemporary issues including fight against terrorism and occupation of foreign territories and peoples.

31. Besides strengthening discrimination against Muslims, this insidious association is preventing Muslim communities from practicing their religion freely or integration in the society, in many countries. Discrimination on multiple grounds of religion, ethnicity or culture further affects enjoyment of their basic human rights including economic, social and cultural rights. Durban Review Conference, therefore, must look into this contemporary manifestation of racism and seek proscrïption of this practice through legal and administrative measures. As the existing national laws and courts have failed to address the issue, internationally binding normative standards need to be devised that can provide adequate guarantees against defamation of religions and religious intolerance.

42. Recognizes that there have been increasing risks of stereotyping Muslims and other groups and expresses its commitment to combat this phenomenon;

Section 3 - Promotion of the universal ratification and implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and proper consideration of the recommendations of the CERD

Replies from CERD [Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination]

When examining periodic reports, the Committee has expressed its concern about reported cases of "Islamophobia" following the 11 September attacks. Furthermore, while taking note that the criminal legislation of some States includes offences where religious motives are an aggravating factor, it has regretted that incitement to racially motivated religious hatred is not outlawed. The Committee has recommended that States give early consideration to the extension of the crime of incitement to racial hatred to cover offences motivated by religious hatred against immigrant communities

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

16. Urge States to take serious steps to address the contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in this context to take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scrïptures and symbols;

131. National laws alone cannot deal with the rising tide of defamation and hatred against Muslims, especially if such trends are spreading to the grass root communities. A framework is needed to analyze national laws and understand their provisions. This could then be compiled in a single "universal document" as guidelines for legislation - aimed at countering "defamation of religions".

Speaker after speaker from the earliest moments of the second session of the Durban II Preparatory Committee declared their intention to turn Durban II into "Durban I plus" on many fronts - including a repeat of the formula for disguising racism as combating racism. Representing the 117 members of the Non-Aligned Movement, as well as the 56 states in the Organization of the Islamic Conference, these speakers represent the majority of members of the General Assembly.

ROME, OCT. 23, 2008 (Zenit.org).- This autumn the Romans have reaped a greater harvest than the usual grapes and olives. The seeds planted 60 years ago this year by the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights are bearing copious fruit through a series of conferences organized by the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See.

The daylong forum, "For Everyone, Everywhere: Universal Human Rights and the Challenge of Diversity," was held at the Istituto Maria Santissima Bambina on Oct. 16. The hall was packed as prelates, ambassadors, professors and students came to listen to a lineup of remarkable speakers.

While the Declaration has flourished over these six decades, its growth has been unruly, stilted in some places, while forced into hybrid hothouses in others. Benedict XVI, during his historic speech at the United Nations, pointed out some of the threats to the document in our contemporary age and the need to re-fertilize its foundations.

The U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, Mary Ann Glendon, responding to the papal invitation to re-evaluate the post-World War II human rights project, opened the conference with a paper by political theorist Jean Bethke Elshtain of the University of Chicago.

Professor Elshtain vividly and poignantly explained how the universality of the Declaration has been called into question in the last few decades both by those who refer to it as a "Western document," pertinent only to the thinking and attitudes of the European-influenced parts of the world, and by interest groups within the West itself who have begun to fragment the document, as if it were a sort of à la carte menu.

Both groups, explained Elshtain, found it easy to reinterpret the document because they chose to ignore its fundamental understanding of the dignity of the human person, Catholic social teaching's greatest contribution to the creation of the declaration.

Common ground

The scene for the next section of the conference was set by a beautiful video produced by the embassy staff, with archival footage of the historic moment in Paris on Dec. 10, 1948, when the Declaration was approved by the U.N. General Assembly. The video featured the original members of the United Nations' first Commission on Human Rights.

Ambassador Glendon then paid tribute to the "great generation" of diplomats who served on that commission, headed by Eleanor Roosevelt. She described the Declaration's adoption without a single dissenting vote as something of a miracle, considering the cultural diversity of the commission's 18 members and the political minefield in which they had to work.

Relations between Russia and the West were deteriorating rapidly, Ambassador Glendon explained, and conflicts were erupting in Palestine, Greece, Korea and China. Yet only eight of the 58 member states abstained: Saudi Arabia, South Africa and the six-member Soviet bloc.

Despite the Chinese Civil War that would lead to the birth of the People's Republic of China the year after the Declaration was adopted, one of the principal authors of the document was the Chinese delegate, the Confucian philosopher, P'eng ch'un Chang.

Remarkably, René Cassin, a French Jew who championed the State of Israel, and Lebanese delegate Charles Malik, who was the chief spokesman at the time for the Arab League, managed to find a common ground to work fruitfully together on the Declaration under emotionally charged conditions.

What happened next

Harvest of the wisdom of many cultures, works of many different hands, and accepted by 48 nations, the Declaration certainly seemed universal when it was adopted. What has since happened to its ability to speak to all men?

Ambassador Glendon pointed out that certain authoritarian regimes began to lay the charge of "Western cultural imperialism" at the door of the Human Rights Project. She noted that those charges were followed, ironically, by efforts of Western special interest groups to formulate their agendas in terms of human rights.

"The more the human rights project showed its power in places like South Africa and Eastern Europe," Glendon said, "the more intense became the efforts to capture its prestige for various ends, not all of which were respectful of human dignity."

She strongly urged all participants to celebrate this important anniversary by reading the document, not as a laundry list, but as a "whole with mutually conditioning parts." Booklets of the document were distributed to all present.

Glendon's remarks were followed by an extraordinary panel of speakers; Professor Hsin-chi Kuan of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Habib Malik, son of U.N. delegate Charles Malik and professor at the Lebanese American University in Beirut, gave papers in a session chaired by the Japanese ambassador to the Holy See, Kagefumi Ueno.

These compelling interventions, frank and forthright regarding situations both past and present, supported the proposition that there was and is a universal basis for the notion of human rights that resonated with people in the East and Middle East, as well as the West.

Papers by Cardinal Renato Martino and Professor Janne Matlary helped, respectively, to relate the Declaration to Catholic social thought, and to reground it in the original vision of its authors, as an integral text with interdependent parts.

During the musical interlude in the late afternoon, Ambassador Glendon proved that some things are indeed universal, such as the capacity of the human heart to be moved by the power of song. Moist eyes were seen among both Eastern and Western visitors as the Amazing Grace Gospel Choir sang "Oh, Freedom," and the setting of Shakespeare's "What a Piece of Work is Man" from the musical "Hair."

Legionary of Christ Father Thomas Williams, author of "Who Is My Neighbor? Personalism and the Foundations of Human Rights," closed the day's session by addressing the nagging question of how to recognize a universal foundation for universal rights. Those who framed the Declaration 60 years ago drew from Catholic social teaching and the idea of human dignity to draft it, while the intervening years have hacked away at that very foundation resulting in an increasing fragmentation of the notion of universal human rights.

Father Williams contrasted two incompatible visions of human dignity: one that sees dignity as possessed by all human beings in equal measure, and only by human beings, and a second vision that admits of degrees of dignity both among humans and among other species as well. Only the first vision, the priest asserted, is capable of grounding universal human rights. Without this grounding, he warned, the Human Rights Project will continue to evolve into a simple list of special interests determined by consensus and subject to the power plays of pressure groups.

* * *

Elizabeth Lev teaches Christian art and architecture at Duquesne University's Italian campus. She can be reached at lizlev@zenit.org.

[g]More than 50 NGO's met three times last week in Geneva to discuss holding another UN NGO Forum "against" racism during the Durban II Conference next April. The group included a contingent of extreme anti-Israel NGOs. Present were representatives from BADIL (BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugees' Rights), EAFORD (The International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination), Nord-Sud XXI, the Union of Arab Jurists, the Syrian UN Association, as well as the League of Arab States. Meeting organizers revealed that requests have already been made to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to make space available within the UN, or to secure the international conference center across from UN premises for the Forum.

During meetings on Thursday and Friday the group purported to create a "Coordinating Committee" which would "facilitate" the NGO Forum during the Durban II Conference. It appears that this Committee will include BADIL and Nord Sud XXI, who recommended themselves for membership.

For incontrovertible evidence of the 'demonization of Israel agenda' emerging from the NGO Forum organizers, what follows is part of a verbatim account of the meetings.

Background on some of the NGO participants

* UN-accredited NGO BADIL has long advocated the end of a Jewish state. The following image taken from BADIL's website is just one example of its antisemitic message.

* UN-accredited NGO EAFORD describes itself <http://www.eaford.org/origins.html> as having been created "in response to...U.N. Resolution 3379, which determined that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination."

* UN-accredited NGO Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru has circulated statements to the UN Human Rights body such as <http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.Sub.2.1998.NGO.13.En?Opendocument> : "America subjugates the world as no empire has ever done in the history of mankind." November 29, 2006, the representative of this NGO told the Human Rights Council: "Today, the Palestinian people are suffering a human tragedy. They are victims of genocide and extermination and that because of the only crime of defending their lives and their ancestral land."

* To explore the modalities of the NGO forum* Reflection on the contents topic of the forum* Make suggestions for the designation of volunteers at the regional level for the consultations and information exchange with national NGOs* Sensitize the actors present in Geneva for adoption of a constructive approach to the Durban review* Establish agenda for the months to come* Prepare a register of grievances for the attention of the OHCHR and the member states of the PrepCom* Set up a coordination committee which will facilitate the compilation of the document- NGO's contribution to the DRC

Afro-Swedish National Association...The UN has repeatedly said the Conference Against Racism is on an equal footing with other major UN conferences and summits in the human rights and social field. This means that the review process is on equal footing with the expectation of resources, attention and the work from the United Nations and governments....The NGO Forum that happened in Sweden in September was the major congregation of European civil society...We had figures from NGO constituencies that discussed problems related to this Conference such as Islamophobia, such as the situation that emerged after 9/11…

African Canadian Legal Clinic (Margaret Parsons) I want to thank the Committee against Racism for organizing this NGOs meeting. I am the executive director of the African Canadian Legal Clinic in Toronto...The NGO community in Canada is working to come together and working hard for not only the Durban Review Conference but for the NGO Forum...There was definitely support for an NGO Forum at the Durban Review Conference that came out of the Brasilia [regional] conference. People are expecting there to be an NGO Forum, one that is supported by governments not just in principle but in fact, so that NGOs can have the resources to participate at the NGO Forum in April. [At the Abuja Regional Conference] African NGOs came together to work on how they are moving forward in preparation for the Durban Review Conference and NGO Forum because coming out of Abuja there was a unanimous call for an NGO Forum…It is imperative that we do have an NGO Forum....I think it is important that we have the ability to be able to talk about the impact of the efforts we've made, and in our own space to be able to hold our governments accountable and to be able to say we are discussing areas in which they failed to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

Red de Mujeres Afrolatinoamericanas, Afrocribenas y de la Diaspora ...In order to contribute to this Durban process we would like the Forum to be possible and to be able to participate in the April Conference. It is very important to us to say we are here to show are presence …This situation requires a coalition and common point and we can find our common points.

Network of Women of African DescentWe think…the Forum for the NGOs is a proposal so that young people may express themselves their ideas and proposals in the combat against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance that still exist in our world.

Indian Movement Tupaj AmaruI want to intervene on behalf of indigenous peoples and as an NGO Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru. I would like to support strongly the organization of a social Forum against racism during the Conference of the Durban Review Process. Why? The reasons are multiple. First we always have suggested this to the PrepCom so that the governments will reinforce measures in the fight against racism after the 11th of September… Because many, many things happened after 9/11. There is more discrimination against indigenous peoples, against Africans, migrant workers, …then genocide against the Palestinian people. It is very important and it must be at the center of our debate.

NGO Committee Against Racism (Charles Graves) The NGO Committee Against Racism has had several meetings here…and what it boils down to now is to find a space here in the Palais des Nations during the Durban Review Conference, in other words we can have a room like this where we can discuss problems like this. We can reserve a room every day like this… or we can reserve rooms at the International Conference Center, which costs money. But we could have contribution from the government of Geneva. We have already written a letter to the High Commissioner [for Human Rights] to ask what she can do for us about the space. It is a problem of space. We are working already together with this other group World Against Racism Network to provide space for NGOs in the Durban Review Conference. We don't know where this space is going to be. We have to decide what the agenda is going to be…We'll do our best to provide space.

African Canadian Legal Clinic (Margaret Parsons) There is consensus around the world, in this room, in other countries for an NGO forum and I think we have support from a lot of regions and governments for an NGO forum.

CIRAC (Circle of International Reflect Action and Communication) We want to put together a strategy that would work as of today on the content of the NGO Forum, on the content of the press conference and perhaps Declaration on the youth which there was in 2001. The message was important and also it was a memorandum of the civil society.

Nord Sud XXIThe PrepCom needs to decide that there will be a Forum.

Interfaith internationalI think its absolutely necessary in the next two days to try to decide on the coordinating committee for an NGO Forum. We want to put together a strategy that would work as of today on the content of the NGO Forum, on the content of the press conference and perhaps Declaration on the youth which there was in 2001. The message was important and also it was a memorandum of the civil society.

Meeting - October 16, 2008 - (partial verbatim record)

NGO Committee Against Racism (Charles Graves) … Set up a Coordinating Committee which will facilitate the compilation of the document - the NGO's contribution to the Durban Review Conference.

…When this Committee is established the question of rooms will be discussed which will be used by NGOs that will come to the Conference which will be either here or at the International Conference Center of the City of Geneva where rooms if we'll have more than 100 people will be gratis.

...This Committee should mobilize the participation in the Forum and the Conference…There should be a final declaration of this meeting and this will also be up to this Committee.

...I believe all members of our Committee except a few are interesting in pursuing the possibility of this Forum. Even if the Committee Against Racism cannot participate or votes...not to participate in this kind of event, the NGO Forum, or whatever you want to call it, then we have to accept the decision of the Committee. That Committee at the moment seems to at least have a majority in favor of exploring the idea of the Forum; it is not just individual. That is the consensus of the Committee. Even if the Committee decides it won't participate in the Forum, I believe NGO members of the committee will actively participate.

...It's difficult to say there is no interest in such meeting.

…We are not creating the NGO Forum of Durban in 2001. We are simply providing a place where people can express themselves in continuation of Durban in 2001. If they want to come here and express themselves we are providing the effort to provide the space that's all.

...Let me read this to you again:

* The Coordinating Committee for the NGO Forum for 2009 Durban Review Conference shall be established after the second substantive session of the PrepCom.* The Coordinating Committee will be composed of the NGOs, civil society structures from all regions that fully support the DDPA.* The Coordinating Committee shall decide on the program for the NGO Forum and promote the broadest participation from all regions.* The Coordinating Committee may co-opt additional members to strengthen its representation.

For the time being the WARN (World Against Racism Network) will function as facilitators or secretariat of the Coordinating Committee.

Simon Wiesenthal (Shimon Samuels)You said the Committee will be composed of the members who fully support the DDPA. Are you referring to the NGO Forum Declaration or the governmental Declaration?

NGO Committee Against Racism (Charles Graves) No, I am referring to the governmental Declaration… The NGO Forum Declaration, we have consulted it very carefully. I have a copy. It has said nothing which would insinuate that there was a racist or anti-Israel element. The paragraph on antisemitism was well stated and well done in the NGO document. So the idea that at the first Durban Conference NGO participation was antisemitic in its Declaration, I don't agree. I don't think it was. One half of the NGOs dissassociated itself from it, but another half didn't. So let's not give the impression to the media that this Forum was dangerous, bad, so on and so forth which has been heard from several sources. This is certainly misrepresentation that many NGOs believe. Many NGOs believe this was the first time in history they could discuss their problems. Whether or not certain groups took advantage of the situation to blast and demean other groups, that is another matter. But the Forum itself, I found it to be quite well worked out. So I am making a distinction about giving a bad name to the NGO Forum in Durban.

Simon Wiesenthal (Shimon Samuels)I want a solid clarification. Are you saying there was nothing anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, is that the position members of this Committee have to take?

NGO Committee Against Racism (Charles Graves) I said "The Coordinating Committee will be composed of the NGOs, civil society structures from all regions that fully support the DDPA." That is what it will do. My personal opinion is that there is too much widespread gossip floating around about the Durban Forum: it was a disaster, a failure, it was antisemitic, so on and so forth which I don't believe. There were other parts of the Durban meeting that were openly antisemitic, but I am not saying the Forum itself was. But this Coordinating Committee that will be set up there is no guarantee it will be semitic or antisemitic. This is the UN. People have the right to say what they want to say. They will say it. We have to accept what people say. We cannot always be keeping people from saying what they are supposed to say. My friend from Simon Wiesenthal is trying to make me reassure him that there won't be a repeat of what happened in Durban. But I cannot guarantee that.

Nord Sud XXIWe are not here to really judge the Forum. If we judge the Forum now, it means we are not sincere. We know among civil society there are a lot of different opinions. Let's not bring our differences here. We are trying to create a Coordinating Committee. So if we are going to have conditions to condemn the civil society for Durban 2001 we will not create anything or even participate in the Durban Review Conference. So do we want NGOs to come to this event as civil society or not? I think yes, because we have been here six months now discussing. We know everybody. We know that we have this problem with the friends of Israel or civil society...We know everything. We are clear. Let's be transparent. We will continue to condemn the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. That's our problem. It is very legislative. It's coming form the Charter of the UN that nobody has the right to accept the occupation of other people's territories. There are a lot of resolutions at the General Assembly, the Security Council, condemning the permanent occupation of Israel of Palestinian and Arab territories. That's our view. But to bring this to the Coordinating Committee…? It is not right. We have to set up the Coordinating Committee now.

Meeting - October 17 - (partial verbatim record)

African Canadian Legal Clinic (Margaret Parsons) The criteria used for the NGOs recommended for the Coordinating Committee are:

* Actively participated in the Conference in Durban 2001, as well as the process that led up to Durban conference* NGOs involved in Durban follow-up, whether on a national or regional level, at the PrepComs that have taken place up until today* They must be NGOs rather than individuals* We looked for regional representation from each region* These NGOs support the DDPA and also support the civil society Forum for the Durban Review Conference.

* The International Committee for the Respect and Application of the African Charter on People and Human Rights

* Rights and Development Forum

Asia

* Movement Against All Forms Of Discrimination And Racism (IMADRE)

* "Mamasilla" (Philippines)

* UN Association of Syria

Nord Sud XXII would like to propose Nord Sud XXI because we have also our affiliation in Middle East.

BADIL (Rania Madi)There are two organizations who are not here for the moment and I would like to add Teja who represents the Arab organizations in Israel and BADIL Resource Center based in Bethlehem.

Afro-Swedish National AssociationI am very glad we have this list now because that shows clearly that we have a group of NGOs from different continents who have agreed on setting up the Coordinating Committee for an NGO Forum at the Durban Review Conference. So that means that matter is settled and resolved at this moment. We do have an agreement that there is going to be an NGO Forum and there is a very potent, strong group of NGOs who are behind this…I think the idea was that it would be expanded to consultations. This will be a good thing that we have group who is ready to start work. Then we can see how we can constitute the participation for the different regions. In order to be able to move the work forward.

African Canadian Legal Clinic (Margaret Parsons) This Committee is working towards organizing the NGO Forum for the Durban Review Conference. That is clearly my understanding. That is what I am signing up for.

Afro-Swedish National AssociationWARN (World Against Racism Network) was established last year primarily to facilitate the work of the Durban Review process. It has some 20 members from all continents, and of course they are of different kinds of ECOSOC and non-ECOSOC NGOs. It has been promoting this work - the NGO preparation for the conference and it has organized together with the NGO Committee Against Racism a letter to the High Commissioner requesting the support for the NGO preparations, and NGO Forum. Its chair is Edith Balentyne from the International Women's League for Peace and Freedom and Krishna Batellli its treasurer.

African Canadian Legal Clinic (Margaret Parsons) It is an NGO Forum - not a space. We cannot compromise on that in terms of its language, its intent and its work. I do not agree on calling it a space. It is an NGO Forum and this is what we are here talking about. It is a Forum and I am not about to capitulate to anti-Durban forces.

Canadian Labor CongressWe want an NGO Forum and I can definitely tell you for my organization which represents 55,000 people we are here and we believe it's important that civil society participate and that there will be an NGO Forum. And I can assure you that the Canadian Labor Congress will participate and we want an NGO Forum.

mariaAdministrateur Messages postés : 14591

Posté le 04/11/2008 23:41:29 (05/11/2008 08:41:29)

MORE PATIENCE NEEDED IN ASSESSING UN HUMAN RIGHTS BODY, ITS PRESIDENT SAYS

Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi (Nigeria)

4 November 2008 – Nearly three years since its creation, more patience is needed in judging the work of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which is still in an “evolutionary” stage, the body’s President told the General Assembly today.

The Council was set up in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights, which had been dogged by accusations of bias and politicization, as part of ongoing UN reform.

“All too often, and most times without any real justification, the Human Rights Council has been criticized in the manner and outcome of its work. Let me appeal for greater circumspection, objectivity and patience in assessing the work of the Council,” President Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi of Nigeria said.

“Two years is hardly enough time to be overly critical of an institution which we strongly believe holds great promise as a universal human rights body.”

The Assembly decision to establish the Council showed nations’ commitment to boosting the UN’s role in ensuring the enjoyment of human rights for all, said Mr. Uhomoibhi, who was elected for a one-year term in June.

One of the reforms differentiating the Council from the Commission on Human Rights is the Universal Periodic Review, a mechanism to examine the record of every Member State.

“In a very particular sense, the decision to empower the Council to consider human rights situations in all countries, through the mechanism of the Universal Periodic Review, not only emphasized the principle of equality among all states, but also underscored the universality of all human rights,” the President said.

He highlighted some of the Council’s activities to the 192-member body, including the adoption in June of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

The Council has also taken steps to address serious rights issues, with three special sessions being held during the reporting period on the situation in Myanmar, violations in the occupied Palestinian territory and the food crisis.

“Given that we live in a globalizing world where an event in one part has the potential of affecting life in other parts, the Council found it necessary to remain vigilant and seized with all situations namely of growing inequality, continuing armed conflicts or other menaces such as climate change and food crisis,” Mr. Uhomoibhi noted.

5. Iran plays an active role in the negotiating sessions of the final document scheduled to be adopted at Durban II. Their role? Advocating the destruction of human rights and fundamental freedoms. In their words:

6. Iran's written "contribution" for the Durban II final document http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/7139.doc has just been released. It claims that the most important form of racism and xenophobia targets culture and religion (ie. Muslims), that all the people of Iran "enjoy equal rights", and "judicial officials are to refrain from using sarcastic, offensive words or phrases that might result in offending the feelings and emotions of listeners." One wonders if that is before or after hanging homosexuals, stoning men and women, or bringing down sentences of cross-amputation. Here is a portion of its "contribution":

"15. The Islamic Republic of Iran informed that the most serious manifestation of setback in the campaign against racism has been the resurgence of racist and xenophobic violence targeting ethnic, cultural and religious communities. According to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the emergence of new forms of discrimination also constitutes a negative impact in combating terrorism and the marginalization of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

17. Regarding Iranian society, the Government informed that article 19 of the Constitution specifies that the people of the Islamic Republic of Iran, regardless of tribal or ethnic origin, enjoy equal rights; and colour, race and language do not constitute a privilege. Through its policies and actions, the Government seeks to ensure that these principles are realized. Consistent with its effort to promote and protect human rights, the Government has adopted various measures, which include, inter alia, in the performance of their duties, judicial officials are to refrain from using sarcastic, offensive words or phrases that might result in offending the feelings and emotions of listeners..."

7. The Asian regional group, which includes Iran, has proposed a major assault on Israel and human rights protection.

Recalling the 2001 Tehran Declaration and Programme of Action by the Asian Preparatory Meeting,

[Editor's Note:The Tehran Declaration includes

21. Recall with deep regret the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories which have an impact on all aspects of their daily existence such as to prevent the enjoyment of fundamental rights, express our deep concern about this situation and call for the cessation of all the practices of racial discrimination to which the Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the Arab territories occupied by Israel are subjected;

33. Express deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return, and recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

34. Re-emphasize the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the right to life, liberty and self-determination;] Operative paragraphs:

18. Recognize Jerusalem as a city of reverence and religious sanctity for three major religions of the world and call for an international effort to bring foreign occupation, together with all its racial practices, to an end, especially in holy shrines dear to the three religions;

19. Reaffirm that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;

26. Express deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return, and recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

27. Re-emphasize the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the rights to life, liberty and self-determination;

68. Express deep regret the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories which have an impact on all aspects of their daily existence such as to prevent the enjoyment of fundamental rights, express our deep concern about this situation and renew the call for the cessation of all the practices of racial discrimination to which the Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the Arab territories occupied by Israel are subjected;

69. Reiterate that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination and urge member States to look at the situation of Palestinian people during the Durban Review Conference and implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East;

Violating freedom of expression:

15. Express deep concern at the use of new information technologies, such as the Internet, to propagate racial hatred, xenophobia, racial discrimination and related intolerance and that children and youth have access to this material;

40. Note with deep concern the widening use by some groups and organizations of the opportunity provided by print, audio-visual and electronic media as well as scienfific and technological progress, such as the Internet, to promote racist and xenophobic propaganda aimed at inciting societies throughout the world to racial hatred and in this connection urge all Governments to take necessary measures against such incitement;

89. Urge States to take necessary measures to denounce, actively discourage and prohibit the transmission of racist and xenophobic messages through all communications media, including new communications technologies such as the Internet;

91. Call upon the world media to establish and disseminate through their relevant associations and organizations a code of ethical conduct with a view to prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred and discrimination in any form, and promoting mutual respect and tolerance among all peoples;

Undermining the effort to end terrorism:

87. Call on states to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as on the grounds of culture, religion and language and that non-citizens are not subjected to racial or ethnic profiling or stereotyping;

Manufacturing victims of discrimination:

77. Urge States to take serious steps to address the contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in this context to take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scrïptures and symbols.

Hot off the press. The latest effort in fomenting anti-semitism, delegitimizing the Jewish state, defeating the effort to end terrorism, destroying free speech and manufacturing Muslim victims of Western human rights atrocities. Also known as, the Durban II Outcome Document.

The UN Preparatory Committee for "Durban II", the Durban Review Conference scheduled for Geneva in April 2009, has just released the latest version of the "outcome document" which is scheduled to be adopted at the Conference itself. As described by the UN Secretariat, the draft reflects the current state of negotiations. And it isn't a pretty sight.

There are four main features of Durban II and its assault on human rights in the name of human rights.

(1) The Demonization of Israel and of Jewish Self-Determination - Modern Antisemitism

(2) Attacking Freedom of Expression

(3) Attempting to Thwart Efforts to End Terrorism

(4) The Victimhood Game - Alleged Discrimination Against Muslims

***

(1) DURBAN II OBJECTIVE NUMBER ONE: THE DEMONIZATION OF ISRAEL AND OF JEWISH SELF-DETERMINATION - MODERN ANTISEMITISM

The UN uses square brackets around proposals which have been the subject of objection and hence, are still up for debate during the Durban II process. Up for debate, that is, if President Obama and other Western and pro-democracy governments attend. Up for debate if you think the protection of human rights is well-served by debating with racists about their racist proposals that they vehemently maintain are anti-racist.

What is not in square brackets - no objection having been made - is the suggestion that Israel is a racist apartheid state, guilty of crimes against humanity and genocide. Why no objection? Either the European Union was asleep at the switch when this proposal sailed through (it wouldn't be the first time), or this is agreed-upon language which will find its way into the Durban II "anti-racism" bible.

72. Reaffirms that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;

The EU has objected to (asked that square brackets be placed around) other Israel-bashing paragraphs. But that doesn't take any of them off the table. There is absolutely no indication that the 56 states from the Organization of the Islamic Conference have any intention of backing down, and they have the numbers to prevail in the UN system.

Here are the Israel-bashing provisions that will be debated at an "anti-racism" conference:

136. [[u]Reiterates its concern about the plight of the Palestinian people and other inhabitants of Arab territories under foreign occupation, urges respect for international human rights law and international humanitarian law and calls for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region[/u];]

137. [Although 7 years have passed since the adoption of DDPA Notes Condemns the fact that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination and that, . Iin order to consolidate the occupation, they have been subjected to unlawful collective punishment, torture, economic blockade, severe restriction on movement and arbitrary closure of their territories. It further notes that iIllegal settlements continue to be built in the occupied territories and that . Tthe Review Conference must look into the human rights situation and urge member states to implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East.]

137. [Expresses deep concern at the plight of the Palestinian refugees and other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories as well as and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return., It and recognizes the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;]

138. [[u]Re-emphasizes the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation and other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the rights to life, liberty and self-determination[/u];]

139. [[u]Recognizes the individuals, groups and nations affected by policies and practices, such as colonialism, slavery and ethnic cleansing, that are based on theories of racial or national superiority, hatred and distinction as to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as culture, religion and language as victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance[/u];]

Section 4 - Identification and sharing of best practices achieved at the national, regional and international levels in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

9. [[u]Reaffirms that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;[/u]]

Still on the table, and not yet discussed, the idea that Israel's capital city of Jerusalem is fair game, along with suggestions of more Jewish racism directed at Christians and Muslims.

Section 1, Part E. Strategies to achieve full and effective equality, including international cooperation and enhancement of the United Nations and other international mechanisms in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

346. Recognizes Jerusalem as a city of reverence and religious sanctity for three major religions of the world [s]and call for an international effort to bring foreign occupation, together with all its racial practices, to an end, especially in holy shrines dear to the three religions[/s];

And here are even more still-to-be-debated racism charges against one and only state - Israel:

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives [s]at all levelsfor combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance , in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001[/s]

Foreign Occupation

93. Expresses deep regret the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories which have an impact on all aspects of their daily existence such as to prevent the enjoyment of fundamental rights, express our deep concern about this situation and renew the call for the cessation of all the practices of racial discrimination to which the Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the Arab territories occupied by Israel are subjected;

127. Reiterates that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination and urges member States to look at the situation of Palestinian people during the Durban Review Conference and implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East;

(2) DURBAN II OBJECTIVE NUMBER TWO: ATTACKING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Here are some of the fundamental rights and freedoms on the chopping block at Durban II: new rules on so-called defamation - not of human beings - but of religion, expansive notions of incitement to religious hatred, and new rules on legal mechanisms to punish anything called "contemporary forms of racism and xenophobia" (i.e. Islamophobia) in "private life". So far the European Union has managed to object to these outrages, now in square brackets.

Section 4 - Identification and sharing of best practices achieved at the national, regional and international levels in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

24 (c) [[u]Elaborating specific laws on combating defamation and incitement to racial and religious hatred, in conformity with obligations under article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination[/u];]

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

16. [[u]Urges States to adopt and enforce legal and administrative measures at the national and local levels, or to strengthen existing measures, with the aim of preventing and punishing expressly and specifically contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in public and private life[/u]];

Still to be discussed, as part of this ongoing "human rights" dialogue, are the following outrageous proposals for the final outcome of Durban II: a code of conduct for journalists, a call for states to highly regulate speech according to Islamic states' concepts of "objectivity," and more and more national and international rules about the concocted "defamation or negative stereotyping of religions."

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

109. Recommends that the use of the new information technologies, including the Internet, should contribute to combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and that they should also be used to promote tolerance and respect for diversity;

110. Calls upon the world media to establish and disseminate through their relevant associations and organizations a code of ethical conduct with a view to prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred and discrimination in any form, and promoting mutual respect and tolerance among all peoples;

111. Calls upon States to prevent, through all appropriate means, stereotyping of any ethnic, racial, national, cultural, religious and linguistic group, and encourage objective and balanced portrayals of people, events and history, especially in the media, recognizing the profound influence that such portrayals have on societal perceptions of groups whose members are frequently victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

140. ...recent events have once again highlighted the need to demarcate the legal contours between freedom of expression and hate speech. OHCHR's proposed Expert Consultations on the permissible limits to freedom of expression, by taking into account the mandatory prohibition of advocacy of religious hatred, should reach some conclusions and recommendations coming out from the consultations should be worthy of including in the Review Conference documents.

146. Calls upon the Durban Review Conference to provide guidelines for States taking into account the assessment of various Durban follow up mechanisms as well as the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the issue of defamation or negative stereotyping of religions;

147. Stresses the importance of the work of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards to elaborate a basic document to fill the gaps in the existing international treaties about the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination;

(3) DURBAN II OBJECTIVE NUMBER THREE: ATTEMPTING TO THWART EFFORTS TO END TERRORISM

Still to be discussed, as part of this ongoing "human rights" dialogue, are outrageous proposals such as "impunity on the ground of freedom of expression and counter terrorism" and a definition of discrimination aimed to cripple counter terrorism efforts.

Section 1 - Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

189. Notes that some of the other obstacles hampering progress in the collective struggle against racism and racial discrimination include; weak legislation and policies, lack of moral, educational and practical strategies, non-implementation of international legal framework and commitments by some, persisting impunity on different grounds such as freedom of expression, counter terrorism or national security as well as sharp increase in the extreme right wing xenophobic political platforms.

235. Calls on states to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as on the grounds of culture, religion and language and that non-citizens are not subjected to racial or ethnic profiling or stereotyping;

Section 5 - Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001

102. Calls on States to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as well as on the grounds of culture, religion and language and that non-citizens are not subjected to racial or ethnic profiling or stereotyping;

Not in square brackets - no objection having been made - are wild allegations of discrimination against Muslims, clearly intended to paint Western governments as diabolical and the war to end terrorism as a fraud. The European Union has failed to object to any of these inflammatory proposals which are guaranteed to fuel intolerance and terrorism directed against the alleged Western perpetrators.

Section 1 - Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

41. Notes that As regards the debate of contemporary forms of racism, some of the most worrying trends since 2001 include racio-religious profiling and discrimination, defamation of Muslims, their faith and beliefs, incitement to religious hatred and its concomitant effects on multiculturalism, national and international peace and stability as well as human rights of the affected communities.

43. Shares the Special Rapporteur's assessment that the most serious manifestations of defamation of religions are the increase in Islamophobia and the worsening of the situation of Muslim minorities around the world. He has mentioned three main developments in this context; [s]a) the stereotypical association of Islam (and Muslims) with violence and terrorism; b) the determination to impose restrictions on manifestation of Islam including construction of mosques and its minarets; and c) monitoring and surveillance of places of worship, culture and teaching of Islam[/s].

45. Acknowledges that the most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia. When it is expressed against migrants it takes the form of religo-ethnic or religo-racial tones, when it is expressed in the form of defamation of religions, it takes cover behind the freedom of expression and when it is expressed in the form of profiling. It hides behind the war against terrorism. Believes that association of terrorism and violence with Islam or any other religion including through publication of offensive caricatures and making of hate documentaries would purposely complicate our common endeavours to address several contemporary issues including fight against terrorism and occupation of foreign territories and peoples.

46. Besides strengthening discrimination against Muslims, this insidious association is preventing Muslim communities from practicing their religion freely or integration in the society, in many countries. Discrimination on multiple grounds of religion, ethnicity or culture further affects enjoyment of their basic human rights including economic, social and cultural rights. Durban Review Conference, therefore, must look into this contemporary manifestation of racism and seek proscrïption of this practice through legal and administrative measures. As the existing national laws and courts have failed to address the issue, [s]internationally binding normative standards need to be devised that can provide adequate guarantees against defamation of religions and religious intolerance[/s]. *

57. Recognizes that there have been increasing risks of stereotyping Muslims and other groups and expresses its commitment to combat this phenomenon;

Up for debate are more and more and more allegations of Islamophobia. The only question is how many such hysterical, false and inflammatory allegations will the European Union allow into the Durban II final product.

Section 1 - [s]Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance[/s]

2. [Notes also with concern the increase in incidents of defamation of religions, a phenomenon involving racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance that is developing in the current political and ideological context and its most serious manifestation in the form of increase in Islamophobia.]

Section 3 - [s]Promotion of the universal ratification and implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and proper consideration of the recommendations of the CERD[/s]

53. ...When examining periodic reports, the Committee has expressed its concern about reported cases of "Islamophobia" following the 11 September attacks. [s]Furthermore, while taking note that the criminal legislation of some States includes offences where religious motives are an aggravating factor, it has regretted that incitement to racially motivated religious hatred is not outlawed. The Committee has recommended that States give early consideration to the extension of the crime of incitement to racial hatred to cover offences motivated by religious hatred against immigrant communities [/s]. [para 8, page 10 A/CONF.211/PC.2/5]

Section 5 - [s]Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments thereto, including in light of developments since the adoption of the DDPA in 2001 [/s]

100. [s]Urges States to take serious steps to address the contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in this context to take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scrïptures and symbols[/s];

142. National laws alone cannot deal with the rising tide of defamation and hatred against Muslims, especially if such trends are spreading to the grass root communities. A framework is needed to analyze national laws and understand their provisions. This could then be compiled in a single "universal document" as guidelines for legislation - aimed at countering "defamation of religions".

NEW YORK - This Monday, November 24th, the UN will commemorate its annual International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People with a film depicting Jews as Nazi-equivalents and a public exhibit mourning the sixty years of Israel's existence.

"The event is an annual reminder that the UN's real agenda is to delegitimize the birth - and the perseverance - of the state of Israel," said Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN.org.

Monday's observance marks November 29, 1947 - the day that the UN voted to establish a Jewish and an Arab state in Palestine - a decision accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. This year's observance is being held a week early due to scheduling conflicts.

As in years past, there will be a formal meeting Monday morning of the Committee on the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, a film, an afternoon meeting of the General Assembly on the "Question of Palestine," and the opening of a public exhibit in the entrance to the UN's New York headquarters.

Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan referred to November 29th as "a day of mourning and a day of grief," and the usual procedure is for UN member state after UN member state to use the opportunity to grieve for the suffering of the Palestinian people at Israeli hands.

The General Assembly is scheduled to adopt another six resolutions condemning only Israel for violations of human rights. The total number of resolutions criticizing Israel expected to be adopted at this fall's General Assembly is 20, as compared to only four resolutions critical of human rights records in any of the remaining 191 UN member nations.

The 2008 installment of what is in essence a repeat of the "Zionism = Racism" allegation, will be the public showing of the film "La Terre Parle Arabe" or "The Land Speaks Arabic." The film draws parallels between the Nazis' final solution and the alleged Zionist design for Palestinians. It is commonly billed with these words: "…the late-19th century Zionists…drew up plans, put them into practice, then…used… force, often brutal."

Here is some of the scrïpt for the UN public's edification:

"Christians and Muslims alike… unite in their hatred of Zionism…I preferred to die as a martyr rather than be governed by the Jews … We were against the Jews… The number of Jews increased constantly… The children cried … The Hagana had no mercy, no pity. Zionists! The Jews were shooting at us, they were facing us… The Jews yelled "turn around you bastards, you dogs." They machine gunned us… They started killing people who were asleep…[We]… found a poor woman… pregnant. They had killed her and the baby came out of the womb. They started slaughtering them until morning."

The exhibit to be opened at 6 p.m. on Monday in the UN lobby - the public entrance through which school children from across the United States and tourists from around the world pass every day - is entitled "The Palestinians: 60 years of struggle and enduring hope." Bayefsky comments: "The "sixty years" of struggle is telling. It puts a lie to the alleged root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict as an "occupation" that began with the 1967 war. The real complaint is the alleged wrong of the creation of the State of Israel itself." She adds: "The carefully selected word "struggle" also speaks volumes. What the UN glorifies as a struggle is a series of wars launched by Arabs to annihilate the state of Israel beginning in 1948, and the ongoing "struggle" of Palestinian and other Arab terrorists dedicated to the same end."

Past UN Palestinian Solidarity Day observances have included:

The display of a map in Arabic with the State of Israel missing altogether

Flying only the flags of "Palestine" and the United Nations, and omitting the flag of the UN member state of Israel

Opening the day with a moment of silence commemorating the death, among others, of suicide bombers or "all those who have given their lives for the cause of the Palestinian people..."

Exhibits promoting terrorism and the alleged right of return while criticizing a host of non-violent efforts by Israel to prevent terrorism from checkpoints to a security fence - all of which are invariably presented as evil steps taken in a vacuum.

"Anyone hoping to see an Israeli flag flown in addition to a Palestinian one in celebration of the UN partition plan that approved a two-state solution, should not hold their breath," said Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN.org. She continued, "the UN tradition of mourning the creation of the state of Israel continues."

Eye on the UN [list@eyeontheun.org]

mariaAdministrateur Messages postés : 14591

Posté le 27/11/2008 14:41:30 (27/11/2008 23:41:30)

ISRAEL GUILTY OF APARTHEID

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. Psalm 2 : 1-12

Watch the UN General Assembly President and the only NGO representative selected by the UN to speak declare Israel guilty of apartheid and mount a call for boycotts, sanctions and divestment

Here is the video of UN General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann's unprecedented attack on a UN member state. It took place on November 24, 2008 at United Nations Headquarters in New York during the UN "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People."

November 24, 2008: UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, New York, UN Headquarters; UN General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann

Here is the only non-governmental representative hand-picked by the United Nations to "speak on behalf of civil society organizations" - Rev. Edwin Makue, General Secretary of the South African Council of Churches. New York UN Headquarters, November 24, 2008. Translated into six languages and webcast around the world.

November 24, 2008: UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, New York, UN Headquarters; Rev. Edwin Makue, General Secretary of the South African Council of Churches

The apartheid charge is especially offensive since the facts indicate the complete reverse. One-fifth of Israel’s population is Arab with more democratic rights than in any Arab state, including the right to vote and stand for election with full and equal access to a fair and independent judiciary. By comparison, Arab states have been essentially rendered Judenrein since the creation of Israel. UN resolutions denounce Jews living in Arab-claimed territory as “Judaization.” But no mention is ever made of “apartheid Palestine.”

9 December 2008 – Navi Pillay took up the post of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in September, just months before this year’s 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on 10 December. She was the first non-white female judge to sit in the High Court of South Africa, and has also served as a judge of the International Criminal Court and President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

UN News Centre: When did you first become personally aware of race and colour?

Navi Pillay: Well, it is a long story. I was sixteen when I wrote an essay which dealt with the role of South African women in educating children on human rights. When the essay was published, my community raised funds in order to send this promising, but impecunious, young woman to university.

I almost didn't make it as a lawyer because, when I entered university during the apartheid regime, everything and everyone was segregated. The registrar actually discouraged me from becoming a lawyer. I was told things like “White secretaries can’t take instructions from a black person”; or was asked “Who in your family is a lawyer?”

Even after graduation, as a black woman, I had to fight against multiple forms of discrimination and barriers. Finally, a black lawyer agreed to take me on board as an intern – but first he made me promise that I would not become pregnant.

I started a law practice of my own in 1967, not out of choice, but because nobody would employ a black woman lawyer. Then, in the early 1970s, I challenged South Africa’s apartheid laws that permitted torture and unlawful methods of interrogation. This resulted in better conditions for many detainees including my late husband and all those imprisoned on Robben Island, including Nelson Mandela.

UN News Centre: How has living and working in apartheid era South Africa, as a person of Indian descent, shaped your career in human rights?

Allowing discrimination, inequality and intolerance to fester and spiral out of control can have genocidal consequencesNavi Pillay: So I grew up in Durban under a system of apartheid that institutionalized racial discrimination, denying equal rights of citizenship to all those who were not white. I later sat as a judge on the Rwanda Tribunal where I came to know in painful detail, killing by killing, the unimaginable destruction of humanity when ethnic hatred exploded into genocide. I know that the consequences of allowing discrimination, inequality and intolerance to fester and spiral out of control can have genocidal consequences. But South Africa’s experience shows with political will and a commitment to act, discrimination, inequality and intolerance can be overcome. We have just witnessed the election of the first African-American President of the United States, a country where racial segregation is as much of a living memory for some as it is for me.

UN News Centre: A few months after assuming office, how do you assess the state of human rights around the world 60 years on from the adoption of the UDHR?

Navi Pillay with Haitian President René Préval on recent visit. (30 Oct. '08) Navi Pillay: An extensive and growing corpus of international law has fleshed out the Universal Declaration’s principles, setting out specific obligations for States in upholding them. These principles have found an echo in the constitutions and laws of more than 90 countries. International, regional and national mechanisms have been put in place to be both the custodians and the monitors of human rights, their promotion and protection. Civil society everywhere vigilantly oversees how laws are interpreted and rights are implemented with growing capacity and influence.

There is no doubt, however, that despite all our advances in law and practice, serious implementation gaps remain in protecting people from fear, injustice and inequality.

Impunity, armed conflict and authoritarian rule have not been defeated. Regrettably, human rights are at times sidestepped to promote short-sighted security agendas. And lamentably, a trade-off between justice and peace is often erroneously invoked when societies emerge from conflict and combatants return to their communities.

It also distresses me that violence against women is still a daily occurrence in too many countries. The UN Security Council and international tribunals have clearly established that rape and other forms of sexual violence can amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity or may be regarded as constitutive acts with respect to genocide. Perpetrators should be brought to justice if cycles of violence and brutal retribution are to be halted.

UN News Centre: Next year’s anti-racism conference in Geneva will review progress made worldwide since the 2001 Durban Conference. What impact can such meetings have on combating racism?

Navi Pillay: The Durban review conference is a timely opportunity to reaffirm the principles of non-discrimination and to build on the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. It is important for States to revisit these commitments and ensure that implementation gaps are closed. When the international review conference meets in April, States will have an opportunity to demonstrate their determination to fight intolerance by moving the anti-racism agenda forward. The conference will evaluate the implementation of commitments governments made seven years ago in Durban to eradicate racial hatred and discrimination. It is imperative that all States participate and contribute to this crucial process in order to consolidate and improve the common ground on fundamental human rights issues we all agree on.

UN News Centre: Some States have decided against attending the conference. What is your view of these withdrawals?

Navi Pillay: Regrettably, last January Canada announced its intention to withdraw from the Durban review conference. And last month, so did Israel.

Behind these decisions stands the controversy that tainted the 2001 Durban Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance and that was caused by the anti-Semitic behavior of some non-governmental organizations at the sidelines of the conference. Yet, what often gets overlooked, is that the document that emerged from the conference itself, the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA), transcended divisive and intolerant approaches.

The DDPA offers a comprehensive global framework for the adoption of more effective anti-discrimination laws and policies. It highlights discrimination against minorities, migrants, and indigenous people, and it empowers civil society to demand accountability for actions committed or omitted by strengthening victims’ grounds for recourse.

The DDPA clearly states that: “The Holocaust must never be forgotten.” It calls for an end to violence in the Middle East and recognizes Israel’s right to security. It urges Israelis and Palestinians to resume the peace process and expresses deep concern about the increase in anti-Semitism around the world, as well as alarm over mounting prejudice related to religious beliefs, including Islamophobia.

UN News Centre: Does the withdrawal of Canada and Israel weaken the conference and the DDPA?

Navi Pillay: If all States are not engaged in the process, the objective of acting decisively on racism and discrimination may remain elusive. Thus, the concerns expressed by Canada and Israel that the review conference will become a platform for denigrating Israel must be addressed. Seven years ago, despite the hatred and hostility that took place on the conference periphery, States transcended this divisiveness in the conference outcome document by reaching a broad agreement on the necessary measures to combat racism and intolerance. They must achieve that commonality of purpose again through active engagement rather than withdrawal.

We owe a frank debate and concrete action to the victims of discrimination, intolerance and racism. We can avoid or overcome friction by focusing on how to give new momentum to the struggle against these unconscionable practices. States have a responsibility to show leadership against racial discrimination and intolerance. What message does a State boycott send to those who are suffering from racism? What message does it send to those who perpetuate racism? This struggle concerns all of us in our increasingly multi-cultural and multi-ethnic societies where the challenges posed by bigotry and discrimination fuel hatred and exacerbate conflict.

UN News Centre: You have had a stellar career practicing human rights law at the national and international levels. What do you see as the principal challenges in your capacity as the High Commissioner, someone who is arguably the torchbearer of human rights on the global stage?

Navi Pillay: I think that there are many challenges. Our problem is that although all states have, at least to some extent, adopted the rhetoric, they have not always made the effort to make their commitment to human rights a reality. So there are gaps in the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and one of the main challenges I face, like my predecessors, is to get the international community to take human rights seriously. When I leave this job, I would like to be able to say that I've made a real difference in some people’s lives, because the organization I head has functioned to its full potential.

FOR months now secularists and proponents of free speech have been warning of the dire implications of an Islamic-inspired United Nations anti-blasphemy resolution. Now Christian leaders too have cottoned onto the dangers posed by the resolution.

According to the Christian Post, the resolution:

Could hinder Christian evangelism and spread sharia law.

Said Carol Moeller, president and CEO of an organisation called Open Doors:

This anti-blasphemy resolution is mostly seen to be putting a ‘chilling effect’ on Christian work and outreach around the world, and that is a very troubling development for us.

The non-binding UN resolution was first introduced by Pakistan and the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the UN Human Rights Council in 1999. It was amended to include religions other than Islam, and has since passed every year.

In 2005, Yemen proposed a similar resolution before the General Assembly and now the 192-nation Assembly is set to vote on it again.

Resolution 62/145, which was adopted in 2007, says it:

Notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. It stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.

Despite good intentions, Moeller said:

The reality is that wherever Christianity and Islam come into relationship with each other in the culture, the net effect has been for Christian evangelism to be silence or to be intimidated through this act.

Although the resolution is non-binding, it has been passed several times giving it a kind of authority and, in effect protecting militant Islamists who retaliate against perceived offenses, Moeller said.

Moeller added:

The slope is so slippery because everything that purports to criticise Islam is considered ‘blasphemy.’ Anything that promotes another religious viewpoint, like Christianity, is considered ‘blasphemy. ‘It really becomes the ultimate weapon against free religious speech around the world.

Earlier this year, the US government mission in Geneva said in a statement to the UN Human Rights Council that :

Defamation-related laws have been abused by governments and used to restrict human rights.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton commented:

It’s obviously intended to have an intimidating effect on people expressing criticism of radical Islam, and the idea that you can have a defamation of a religion [ruling] like this, I think, is a concept fundamentally foreign to our system of free expression in the United States.

It is bizarre, to say the very least, that the Human Rights Council should be used as a platform for this ridiculous resolution, as the very worst violators of human rights are the the Islamic regimes themselves.

Former Iranian Ali Sina, creator of the FaithFreedom blog, points points out in this article that:

Human rights abuses happen in many countries, but never to the proportion and the magnitude of what is happening in Iran and other Islamic countries. In the last few years, and with no little thanks to the Islamic Revolution of Iran, I noticed that the major human right abuses are perpetrated in the name of religion.

I became concerned for the plight of my people in Iran and her neighboring countries and decided to investigate the cause. I asked myself whether all this is because the gentle and peaceful message of Islam is misunderstood and whether there is a way to revive the pure Islam and save my country.

It was in this quest that I realized, to my chagrin, that the human right abuses are not deviations from the true Islam but they ARE teachings of Islam.

GENEVA, Switzerland, MARCH 23, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The Holy See's representative to the United Nations is expressing concern at increased intolerance against Christians, not only in countries where the religion is a minority, but also a majority.

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Holy See's permanent observer at the U.N. offices in Geneva, said this in an address March 16 before the ordinary session of the Human Rights Council.

He noted that in many parts of the world, "religious minorities, including Christian minorities, still face daily discrimination and prejudices."

"The Holy See expresses its concern," said the representative, "on the increasing situations of religious intolerance and calls upon States to take all the necessary measures -- educational, legal and judicial -- intended to guarantee the respect of the right to freedom of religion and to protect religious minorities from discrimination."

He referred to a meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe at the beginning of March in Vienna, Austria, on the topic of "Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians."

The emphasis of this meeting, he said, was that "the denial of the rights of Christian communities is not only an issue where they form a minority, but that discrimination and intolerance may also exist where Christians are a majority in society."

The archbishop noted that many States are "increasingly siding with a new secularist policy that aims at reducing the role of religion in public life."

He stated that "the Holy See calls upon these States to be inclusive and to recognize the important role religions can play within society."

"Religions," the prelate added, "in fact, contribute to the promotion of moral and social values, which go beyond an individualistic concept of society and development, seeking the common good as well as the protection and the respect of human dignity."

He affirmed that the freedom of expression can best be protected by "the implementation of the universal principle of freedom of religion."

He asked that each state "look into its own national legislation" and "consider how it can encourage a frank but respectful discussion between members of the same religion, between representatives of different religions and persons who have no religious belief."

Archbishop Tomasi continued: "One should, however, at all times keep in mind that the right to religious freedom is intrinsically related to the right to freedom of expression.

"Where followers of religions have no right to express their opinion freely, the freedom of religion is not guaranteed."